that's why we build them this way. that's how we run. nothing runs like a deere. visit your dealer or johndeere.com/howwerun to see the new signature series and 1 family tractors.

>> chris: i'm chris wallace. will charm be enough to bridge the differences in the battle of the budget? president obama reaches out to all members of congress just as house republicans and senate democrats come out with dramatically different blueprints for our fiscal future. what are the chances for a compromise? we will ask two is senators leading the debate, democrat dick durbin and republican bob corker. then, republican at a crossroads. as conservative activists gather in washington, gop leaders argue about the future of the party. we'll discuss differences within the gop with matt kibbie

of freedom works and former congressman steve latourette of the republican mainstream partnership. the u.s. responds to north korean threats by beefing up its missile defense as the president heads to israel. we will ask our sunday panel whether mr. obama has the right answers to foreign policy challenges around the world. and our power player of the week. a celebrity chef combines the classic with the cutting edge. all right now on "fox news sunday." >> chris: hello again and happy st. patrick's day from fox news in washington. the president met with republicans and democrats in both the house and senate this week. but for all of the talk of a grand bar gain there was no sign the two parties are any closer to bridging the divide over our nation's debt. we want to discuss the chances for a deal with two key senators.

dick durbin the senate's number two democrat joins us from chicago. tennessee republican bob corker is in chattanooga. gentlemen, while the president was meeting with members of congress, house republicans and senate democrats put out their budget plans which had dramatic differences. let's take a look at them. the gop plan would cut the deficit $4.6 trillion over ten years, all through spending cuts. the democratic plan would cut the deficit $1.8 trillion half through spending cuts and half through tax hikes. senator corker, let me start with you will senate republicans accept a tax increase if you get serious entitlement reform and cuts? >> i think senate republicans and all republicans want to see a 75 year solution to entitlements and i think republicans are joined in wanting to see tax reform so to the extent that generates revenues and how that is scored obviously that will be debated

as we move ahead but i think all of us understand the real issues driving the deficit is in our o country are the entitlements. we want to see these available for generations to come. >> chris: but real quickly you you understand the price for entitlement reform in any deal would be a tax increase. would you buy that and what do you think are the prospects there willle be a deal sometime before this summer? >> well, again, i think there by the way is a chance on a deal. i know the president is saying the right things and we have an opportunity over the next four to five months i think that we will know when the president is serious by virtue of a process that is set up where he is actually at the table or whether he has a di designee ad whether he begins to say publicly to the american people to all americans that he underand its that americans are only paying one third of the cost of medicare and that has to change for the program to be here down the road.

look, chris, i think republicans if they saw true entitlement reform would be glad to look at tax reform that generates additional revenues and that doesn't mean increasing rates. that means closing loophole os. it also means arranging our tax system so is that we have economic growth. and i think we have been saying that from day one. >> chris: well, senator durbin, i heard some give there from senator corker. let me he ask you. are senate democrats willing to make serious cuts, reforms to entitlements if you get added tax revenue and what are the prospects tor for a grand bar ? >> what he articulated is what we did in the bowles simpson commission and what we have done since. we said let's put everything on the table and i want to thank bob be for saying that. we have to, of course, pass the budget resolution in the senate. patty murray has done an extraordinarily good job and then move to the next stage and

that is the grand bargain stage. both sides sitting down on a bipartisan basis not eliminating medicare as emhe afraid the paul ryan budget would do but making sure it survives for generations to come. putting revenues on the table that are fair and won't penalize the working people across america and making sure it is a balanced approach. i think what bob corker just said from his side is a basic principles that both parties can rally around. >> chris: and real specifically because i want to pin you down on this, are you saying you would accept structuralle chains, not doing away with medicare but structural changes and cuts to entitlements? >> let me tell you in 10-12 years medicare goes broke. that unanswered questions unanswered questions acceptable. the paul ryan voucher aapproach

is destructive of medicare. there are ways to approach it to reduce the cost of medical ep our promise to seniors across america. >> chris: part of the problem in the debate is that the parties seem to be disagreeing about the importance of dealing with our national debt. i want to play what president obama said this week and also what he said back as a candidate in 2008. take a look. >> we don't have an immediate crisis in terms of debt. in fact, for the next ten years it is going to be in a sustainable place. >> we now have over $9 trillion of debt that we are going to have to pay back. $30,000 for every man, woman and child. we havthat is irresponsible. it is unpatriotic. >> chris: senator durbin, when candidate obama said that our national debt was $9 trillion. it is now $16 trillion. so the question is if it was

unpatriotic at $9 trillion, is it sustainable at $16 trillion? >> chris, here is is the good news. we reduced the long-term deficit by about $2.4 trillion including only $600 billion in new revenue as part of the fiscal cliff. we still have to do more but we have taken the edge off the crisis. i willle concede that. what the president is pointing to is this. we need strong economic recovery. we need to put americans back to work. that is our first priority. deficit reduction i would put as the second priority and one that is coupled with economic growth. so i think we can do both. make sure we have deficit reduction but don't cut too much too fast. take for scamel the sequestration. 700,000 american jobs will be lost. h is not the right time to do it. we have to phase this in and sequence it so we have economic growth and americans paying taxes. that really helps us recover.

>> chris: senator corker, democrats and you just heard this sort of from dirk durbin but i heard it in more extreme forms from other democrats say it is more important to have economic growth than to deal with the national debt. your response? >> i think we should have economic growth and obviously we would like to see that happen and i think reducing the deficit helps cre create econoc growth. look, i think it is ridiculous to say that cutting $1.2 trillion over the next decade when we will spend $47 trillion of your money is a step too far. of course, we need to do that. and on top of that we need to build towards the entitlement reforms which obviously are creating the huge dent down the road. i think it was disappointing to all of us to have the president come in and talking the way that he is and by the way, i attend the dinner and have been on o the phone calls and met with the white house and appreciate the outreach. but in the midst of that to act as if this deficit issue is not that important was a little

disheartening. i do think, chris, again, i think we have the best opportunity we are going to have under president over the next four months to solve this problem and i look forward to working with dick durbin and others as we try to build on the commonnallities that we have. we have a lot of things that separate us but there is enough commonnallity to build off of that. the post morn thing we can do for our nation's economic growth and long-term security and that is what we need to be focused on. >> i am getting a kind of hopeful sense from both of you and i want to pick up and button this up quickly with you, senator durbin. do you agree this is the last best chance for a big deal and how optimistic are you that you will be able to pull it off between now and let's say mid summer? >> listen if you are senator you have to be patient. but i have been at this for years and this is an excellent opportunity. both side have to come together. what bob sade and what i tried to say this morning is there are elements in this that we can all agree on on a

bipartisan basis. what the president is trying to do is not a charm offensive but basically to say to the seriousans i'm suous about about this and will sit down to come up with a grand bargain. let's not miss this opportunity. >> chris: before you deal -- >> chris. >> chris: go ahead, senator. >> if i could say one thing. think we will all know again when the president is serious will be when begins using the podium to explain to the american people that the average american family is only paying one third of the cost of medicare. when begins to lay that out from h his podium. i have been saying that for years and dick durbin has been saying that for some time. but when the president uses his bully pull pit tpit to explaint families are only paying one third of the cost of medicare we will know that he has begun the process to solve that

problem. i hope that happens when gets back from israel. >> chris: before you deal with the budget you have to pass a continuing resolution before march 27 and going on recess at the end of this week, to keep the government running otherwise it shuts down. the question, senator durbin, is will the senate pass a cr, a continuing resolution that keeps spending at $984 billion which is what the spending level is of the house cr including the sequester cuts? >> chris, when i left, washington, on thursday we had 99 amendments pending to the continuing resolution. the budget for the federal government. 99 amendments. six of the amendments were on the issue of our relationship with egypt. this is all very important i understand. we have work to be done in just a short period of time. i urge senate colleagues let's get the cr passed. we can do it and do it quickly this coming week. >> chris: direct question will you pass a cr at $984 billion

which is the house level that includes the sequester cuts? >> listen we have put together a cr that is acceptable in its dollar terms to the house of representatives and i think we can agree on with them. >> chris: gentlemen, running out of time. i want to ask you each about a question that you are involved in. senator durbin you are part of the bipartisan senate group working on immigration reform. are you you going to be able to come up with a plan that creates a pathway to citizenship for the 11 million illegals who o are now in this country and if so when are you going to put the plan on the table? >> we are working literally hours every week. four democrats, four republicans. and we are making progress. there is still some tough, tough issues out there but i feel good about it. there is a feeling in that room that we have a responsibility to this nation after 25 years to write an immigration law that we can live with for generations to come. >> chris: what is the biggest

problem? >> there is several problems. we are dealing with border enforcement which is very important on the republican side of the table. we are dealing with the question of the 11 million people paying their taxes, having a path to legalization and then ultimately to citizenship. tough issues but we are coming together and i think we can do it. i have a positive feeling. >> chris: finally, senator corker, you are the top republican on the senate foreign relations committee. this week on friday the pentagon announced they are going to deploy 14 additional missile intercepters to alaska to deal with the potential nuclear threat from north korea. what do you think of the idea? how serious do you think is the threat from the north korean a a good morning and are we paying a price for the fact that president obama scaled back on missile defense when came into office? >> well, look, i applaud the efforts. i talked to senator kerry and i know we have a group heading off to poland on monday to talk about this further. i applaud it as i mentioned. i do hope we will focus on a

base on the eastern side with radar facilities. and i think the question is, chris, how does the nondeplowment of the fourth phase of our european based issues it temperature affect us over time. there is technical issues we will be getting into this week with the the pentagon and the state department but certainly i think most all of us applaud the efforts to beef up our missile defense on the west coast chris do you think that kim young unand the north koreans are a threat to the u.s. >> i don't think they have the mechanism to really harm us. i think it puts us in a different place as it relates to negotiating with them. at the end of the day, chris, i know there is a lot of talk, six party talks, all kind of things that are occurring. all of us understand the key to this is going to be china. they are the ones that can

affect the behavior of north korea because of the trade issues and certainly support issues coming from china into north korea. hopefully china sees the threat for nuclear proliferation in that part of the world in the event they are not able to stop what north korea is doing. >> chris: thank you both. we have to leave it there. thank you for talking with us and no doubt there is tough par beginning' head on -- bargaining ahead on the budget. thank you, gentlemen. >> thank you you. >> chris: up next, the battle inside the gop o over how to gw the party.

>> held the annual meeting this week and if you you can leave it a presidential straw poll for 2016. here are the results. senator rand paul won with 25%. marco rubio was a close second at 23 and former presidential candidate rick santorum a disthird at 8%. the cpac meeting highlighted the disagreement over the best way for the party to broaden its base. matt kibbe. gentlemen, back to fox news sunday. congressman latourette you talked about the 40 to 50 chuckle heads your phrase in the house who are blocking senator or rather speaker boehner from making a budget deal with the president. what is it about the tea party freshmen that make them chuckleheads? >> i don't think i would say

that it is all the tea party freshmen. 40 or 50 in the 112th congress that seemed more interested in voting no going home than governing and that comment was made after plan b chris and plan b was to just raise taxes on people making over a million dollars. >> and it was the opening gap but and would have given the speaker the opportunity to go to the white house and over to the senate and say here i have a package and now let's continue our negotiations. when you take it down as the speaker said in our meeting after that, you send them to the the white house naked. he has no armor. he has no tools. >> chris: looking forward, mr. kibbe, what is it about the tea party and its views on spending and taxes that members of the republican establishment like congressman latourette don't get? >> have to take a step back and understand the only reason we are talking about a balanced budget, the only reason we are having a sear rouse debate about 16 plus it willed in debt is because of the tea party class of 2010 and the folks we added in 2012.

you have to stop this process. this bipartisan process is of just kicking the can down the road and creating these artificial crises on new year's eve and say let's put ideas on the table and let's stop playing this game and that is what we have done. and we are never going to fix this problem just by pretending that the process of bipartisan somehow gets to real problem shot clock crisis was created by republicans and democrats not making tough choices. >> that flies in the face of what bedid in the 1990s. bill clinton the president and john kasich and newt beginning we created the balanced budget act of 1997 and it was during the bush years of spending multiplied now by the obama years that we have the mess. my difficulty with the tea party freshmen isn't the true passion. they are an important part of the republican party. at the end of the day you have

to govern. just saying no doesn't get you anything and create these falls crises. you can get past the false crises if you work something out. it doesn't mean sur renning principle. working together in a way that you get 60% of what you want. >> you have to go back. i don't think the tea party has created the budget crisis. we came in with members and tried to do something about it. i remember a day when april 15 is when the house and senate had to pass a budget resolution. i remember when they had to reconcile the 13 appropriations bills and a day when the president actually had to introduce his budget and today we don't do any of that stuff and that is how we got to the $16 trillion and there is something rational about standing on the tracks and saying we can't do this any more we have to do it some other way. >> if that was the way these guys are operating i would be all for that. we couldn't even get our labor health and human services bill the biggest of the bills

besides defense out because three of our members wouldn't support the chairman's mark. that is not trying to solve the problem and move forward. i'm telling you you can't get it done. and just voting no and then holding your nose and saying boy if it passes i can go home to the local tea party groups and say i voted no that is dicoelous and what makes them chuckle heads. >> chris: let me switch to another subject. one of the reese splits in the party and we saw it in the last week has been over national security. you backed rand paul's filibuster of the president's drone policy in the senate and backed the sequester of across-the-board cuts even in the pentagon. isn't one of the gop's strengths with the american people that it is tough on national security? >> you can can be fiscally responsible and tough on national security. >> chris: the drone has nothing to do with fiscal issues. that is a question -- >> there is two issues here is. one is about basic civil

liberties and i think the new gop reflected by rand paul's willingness to challenge the status quo in both the republican and democratic parties is a healthy thing and young people in particular they are looking for leadership that is willing to challenge the idea that the government is always right. i think that is where we are as well. but on defense and on any franklny program any department of the federal government let's all acknowledge that there is waste and things that had to to be eliminated and a trimming of defense would be a very healthy thing. and you have to put everything on the table. you can't say this sacred cow cannot be touched. i think the gop made that mistake. >> chris: congressman latourette rand paul in his speech at cpac talked about defense hogs like john mccain and lindsey graham as stale and moss covered. there is a war weariness in the country. should the republican party in trying to grow the party and field the new voters should it

be pulling back on national defense? >> i grew up in the air rafferty the $800 hammer and $600 toilet seat. there are efficiencies there. if you are looking to the county tuesday for something that the government is actually supposed to be involved in, it is defending the country. thsequestration was the most hm handed way of dealing with thing. they won't give an inch and it is incumbent upon us to find the sweet spot. boehner tried to do it with the president and the president isn't willing. we have to find the sweet spot that includes the pentagon. >> chris: you said dysfunction and kind of motioned in mr. kibbe's direction. do you think the tea party is adding to the dysfunction in washington? >> not at all. i think the tea party is an important part of the coalition that is the republican party. my difficulty with not necessarily mr. kibbe's groups but other groups like his is there is now some kind of litmus test what makes a good

republican and a bad republican and the reason we he don't have a republican president is that we don't represent the whole country. we don't have one member of congress who is a republican from the entire eastern seacoast until you get down to the carolinas and virginia. you can't govern the country unless you look like the country. i think they are an important part of the coalition but they are not the republican party. they are part of the republican party. >> chris: in a sense you may have energized the party but also narrowed it. >> i don't think so. if you look at the rock stars of the gop and next generation and people that he woo are excited about these are tea party freshmen. rand paul. ron johnson. pat toomey from pennsylvania and, of course, marco rubio. we brought diversity. we brought energy and most ideasantly i think we brought because we are color blind. if you want to come to the senate and offer a plan to balance the budget we will support you. put your ideas on the table.

that is what is lacking in the whole debate. >> i got to say sadly what they also brought us as harry reid as the major leader continuing in the senate. if you looked at the nevada race, sharon engel and richard murdoch in indiana and i forget the name, the witch in delaware. >> chris: kristine o'donnell. >> thank you. we could have functional control of the united states senate. >> chris: there were a lot of establishment republican candidates who went down in the last the election, too. >> went down from the standpoint that they lost to democrats unlike some of these mr. murdoch for instance. we are supposed to wonder chris richard murdoch, indiana. >> why we don't have the women's vote when we have a candidate suggesting that a child born as a result of rape is a gift from god. i'm not wondering why we don't have more women voting for republicans. >> chris: let me ask you about that. karl rove called the conservative victory project to try to get into the the

primaries to make sure there are more electable republicans. congressman you are about to start your own super pac to promote electable candidates in republican primaries. have any problem with that. first of all, why do you think that is wrong? >> i think the definition of electable is what we are debating here and you you look at who has been winning elections. it has been interesting exciting young inne energetic e like ted cruz and marco rubio and if you apply the establishment litmus test which tends to be biased for people already in office you will not get the new energy. remember, karl rove supported arlen specter as far back as 2004 against pat toomey because the logic wasn't can't possibly win. arlen specter flipped parties to become the 60th vote for obama care. we need to be careful about what it means to be electable.

certainly the tea party doesn't bat a thousand but at least we are winning elections and bringing new people into the party and not in a position where the democrats can jam something through with 60 votes in the senate because of the tea party. >> i got to tell you that there is in litmus test that the republican mainstream has. i'm happenmy to have anybody that labels him or her areself as a republican and wants to represent the entiretry. we are not talking about the governor of south carolina and the governor of texas and the governor of utah. we have to look like america. today we look like a bunch of white guys from below the mason dixon line. >> chris: how do you look more like america? >> talk about issues in the way i interest to talk about issues. for instance i never read anything in my republican playbook and i have been a republican since the day i was born that says that republican and trade unionists can't get alonlong together. the carpenter and operating engineer. somehow the whole war and prevailing wage has become a

plank to the republican party. no, it is not. we don't have to be opposed to everything that helps us get clean air and clean water. that is not republican test but if you look at the key votes that some of the groups are score, and 1 votes was scored by mr. kibbe's group out of a thousand that took place last year. it is like a poll. you can make it look anyway you want to chris you get the last word, mr. kibbe. >> if you look at the new republican party the party that stands for something. tim scott and ted cruz and marco rubio and labrador and justin amosh. mia love almost got through. this is the new future and based on ideas. we don't care about the color of your skin. >> chris: we have to leave it there. to be continued, thank you both for coming in. we will stay on top of debate. and in addition, up next we will continue this conversation with our sunday group. what does the gop need to do to attract more

if mr. paul wants to be taken seriously you, he needs to do more than pull political stunts that fire up impressional libertarian kids in it their college dorms. >> the gop of old has grown stale and moss covered. i don't think we need to name any names, do we? >> chris: republican senators john mccain and rand paul trading some pretty tough shots about paul's recent filibuster over the president's drone policy. and it is time for the sunday group. bill kristol of the weekly standard. nina easton from fortune magazine. the founder of americanroads karl rove and democratic strategist joe trippi. bill, you have an editorial in the latest issue of the weekly standard in which you say that rand paul is wrong on natural security as a matter of policy and politics.

why, especially is he wrong on a matter of politics? >> because the republican party to the degree it has been a successful party and important party and contributory american well being over the last 50-60 years has been so in large part because it has been the party of strong national security. you can say it is stale and moss covered but some of us are proud to have come to washington to work in a very minor role for ronald reagan and some of us are proud to have supported the bush administration after 9/11 and fighting epimieses and the problem with the obama administration is not that it is too assertive. the problem is that we are retreating all around the world and unfortunately emboldening our enemies. if rand paul wants to run to the left of the obama administration he is tree to ned ahat in the republican minute. maybe this is more is support for that than i think but i doubt there really is. >> chris: nina, the president thinks bringing the troops home not in a rush but steadily and eventually is a winning message

in the last campaign, frankly not talking about open-ended commitments. does the gop need to recognize and respond to a war weariness in the country? >> i think the drone issue and war we areness are two totally different issues. rand paul's war and drones is a war on a pretty successful fight against terrorism right now. i'm not sure where that gets us. i agree with bill that the gop doesn't lose by being a strong party of national security. what we -- what the republicans lost were moderates new election. thin in the 56% of moderates self-described moderates went to barack obama not to the party. those are the people you need to get back. you will not do it by a drone going after drones. you will do it by not making comments about "legitimate rape or you need to appeal to single women. you need to appeal to people at the bottom of the economic ladder, by, which the way, we

heard a lot of as cpac. you heard that from a number of the speakers there. >> chris: everybody agrees legitimate rape was stupid and that if there is a child out of a rape that is what god intended. but does it -- in a more subtle way, rand paul talks about that you need to embrace liberty and the personal sphere and even talked about maybe we don't enforce the drawing laws entirely. morenow, that gets to be a ticklish issue and the fact is the social conservatives are a big part of the republican base. >> he didn't go down the road of for example gay marriage which there really is a seat change in the country over and some change within the republican party over. chris and what do you think would happen if you became more accepting of gay marriage in the republican party? >> i think if you included people who were accepting of gay marriage in the republican party then i think it help the republican party.

the party needs to be more inclusive of people of different views. >> i want to ask you specifically because you kind of have a dog in the fight. awe mentioned earlier you are one of the founders of american crossroads and starting the group conservative victory project. and the idea is to help republicans and n. their primaries back people that can actually get elected in general elections. sarah palin went after you you at cpac yesterday. let's take a look. >> these experts who keep losing elections you keep getting rehired, raking in millions. if they feel that strongly about who gets to run in this party then they should buck up or stay in the truck. buck up and run. >> chris: so you bucking up? i'm not quite sure i got that. becoming up, staying in the truck or running. papalin says basically the last thing the party needs is people from the washington establishment didn't mention

your name but i think you were here she was talking about vetting republican candidates? >> first of all, i live in texas, i don't live in washington. >> chris: you are little dirty here now you. >> second of all, sarah palin should be agreeing with us. she didn't support todd akin and when said the reprehensible things he said she wisely came out and said he ought to get out of the race. >> chris: the legitimate rape candidate. >> if she can play in primaries other people can play in primaries. first of all, raking in millions. i'm a volunteer. i don't take a time for my work with american cross roads. i even pay my own travel expenses out of my own pocket. i thought she was about encouraging grass roots activity. i'm a volunteer. i appreciate the encouragement i should go home to texas and run for office. i would be enthused to have her support. i don't think i'm a particularly good candidate sort of a balding fat guy. second of all if i did run for office and win i would serve out my term.

i wouldn't leave office mid term. >> chris: i wonder who he was referring to. which brings me to you. how much are you enjoying this? >> you hate to see this kind of fighting inside a party especially the other party. it is great stuff but i mean look you got chuckle head, moss covered and stale. i mean these are -- there is like three wings of the party right now and when the stale and moss covered are apologizing to the whacko birds which is what mccain actually did. >> this coming from the guy who ran the campaign of the screamer. the party ha doesn't have the white house tends to have the difficulties. nothing new and nothing exceptional. >> the issue here is i think look you will have the fights inside of parties but every time you have had one the party -- that party tends to lose. we have already seen it in the senate races that bill kristol

talked about earlier. you give up something when you have the fights. and we have had them in the democratic party but it doesn't bode well for 2014 or 2016 because it is going to be settled in those primaries. not to be settled in the intervening time right now. this is going to be a fight that goes down in the house races, senate races in 2014 and in the end these two or three wings are going to have a fight. >> chris: karl, what do you make of the fight going on in the party on national security? on social issues? i mean there does seem to be something did going on here. a pretty serious flaming. >> there is from people watching it closely. i'm not sure how many people are watching it closely. rand paul smartly took advantage of a huge mistake by eric holder. eric holder was asked a simple question by rand paul and senator ted cruz of texas. if a u.s. citizen who is a suspected terrorist is sitting in a coffee shop having a cup of coffee does the president

have the power to take him out with a drone strike. virtually everybody in the republican party and i is suspect a lot of democrats would say no, the president does not have authority to take out somebody who is sitting there having a cup of coffee who is not imminent threat. >> chris: we are running out of time. bill kristol says it looks like he is running to the left of barack obama. >> he is to the left of barack obama in this regard and not the thing rand paul talked about. he believes that the u.s. born clare rick who led al-qaeda in yemen should not have been taking out by a drone strike but should have been arrested and given legal representation and tried in a court of law. virtually all republicans i think would disagree with rand paul on that. that is where the division comes. rand paul took the emphasized where republicans agreed with him not where republicans disagreed with him. >> chris: we have to take a break right here. this is what we will talk about on panel plus because there is a lot more to discuss. we we come back, the u.s.

builds up its missile defense, responding to north korea's threat of a nuclear attack. the capital one cash rewards card gives you 1% cash back on all purchases plus a 50% annual bonus. and everyone wants... ♪ 50% more doo wop ♪ 50% more buckarooooooooos ♪ 50% more yeeeaaahhhh!!!! ♪ 50% more yeah yeah [ male announcer ] the capital one cash rewards card gives you 1% cash back on every purchase, plus a 50% annual bonus on the cash you earn. it's the card for people who like more cash. ♪ 50% more boogie ♪ what's in your wallet? cashhhhh!!!

the united states has missile defense systems in place to protect us from limited icbm attacks but north korea in particular has recently made advances in its capabilities and has engaged in a series of irresponsible and reckless provokations. >> chris: secretary of defense hagel announcing the u.s. will deploy 14 more missile intercepters in alaska to terrorist attack a threatened attack by north korea. the pentagon says it is a

response to recent threats by the new north korean leader and the vice chairman of the joint chiefs of staff said this we believe that this young lad, love this, this young lad ought to be deterred by that and if he is not we will be ready. bill, how seriously do we really take a threat of a nuclear strike from north korea and what is this all about? >> the missile intercepters were planned by the bush administration and one of the first things the obama administration did is cancel them and now they are deploying them. better late than never but you it is a little late. north korea moved ahead its nuclear weapons tests and tested delivery systems and there were iranian observers apparently and they are are very close to pakistan. is there a serious problem that north korea has become a nuclear weapons state and talking to other states that are nuclear weapon states or on the verge of becoming that. yes, i'm for missile defense

but doesn't substitute for a robust foreign policy which deals with the states before they become nuclear states and raises the questions of what happens with iran. the national security advisor said the united states will not accept north korea as a nuclear state. isn't that nice. in they are a nuclear state and how seriously can they take the president when they say we won't accept iran as nuclear state. >> chris: in fairness, president bush was talking northnuclear tests in north korea as being unacceptable and it happened and we accepted it. >> agreed. >> chris: let's talk about the fact that this is a big change for president obama who was scaling back on missile defense when came into office as bill pointed out. >> it is an acknowledgement of a couple of things. this little lad has declared that he wants to issue -- >> chris: kim jong il. >> the threats have gone up.

what also threatening is that china seems less able to control north korea. they tried to block the latest nuclear test and were unable to do so. then we have to wean off the whole cycle of they issue the provokations and someone comes forward with chick aid. economic aid. the two issues. speak of iran the chief of the strategic command said we may need the missile defense on the east coast for iran. this is something that we are going to have to be dealing with on both fronts with both countries. but the missile defense they have a limited ability. what are they like 50% accuracy effectiveness. you do have to keep pushing on all fronts. >> chris: karl, all this comes as the president heads to israel for his first visit as president and in an interview you with israeli television this week he was asked about

the threat from iran. take a look. >> now, we think that it would take over a year or so for iran to actually develop a nuclear weapon but obviously we don't want to cut it too close. >> chris: how do you think president obama is handling the threats from north core are rhea and from iran and i think it is only fair to point out both of which continue their nuclear buildup under president bush? >> first of all, in north korea i think after ten years of trying to experiment with sanctions that are loosened in the aftermath when north korea agrees to do something we learned painfully that north korea never does what it says it is going to do. this is a tough thing to deal with. part self-made. the united states has a policy calling for reunification of both north and south korea. china doesn't want them reunified because it doesn't want a capitalist democracy on

its border and the south koreans don't want reunification either. prosperous country. 25 million people in the north and one of the most abject states of poverty one can imagine. until we sort of forego a unification we are not going to necessarily get the cooperation we need from china. maybe what we ought to do is not be provoked into giving any kind of concessions and reexamine whether or not we ought to step back from the polyof reunification with the help that as north korea misbehaves more it will drive china to help and step in. >> chris: and iran? >> the president misplayed this also from the beginning. he had a chance to destablize the regime and missed it. >> chris: during the election in. >> in 2009. we get hints the u.s. government has been active taking steps behind the scenes with computer viruses to slow this up. one year to get a nuclear

weapon is really not a lot of time and there will be one moment of vulnerability when all of the materials are brought together in one place to begin to make a weapon and i hope to god the united states and the israelis have the ability to know when that moment is and to deal with it. >> chris: interested in the president saying we don't want to cut it too close. seems we are close right now. the interesting thing, joe, about all this is that when american presidents go to israel and again this will be obama's first trip there as president the top issue is always the prospects for peace between the israelis and the palestinians. nobody is talking about that in any serious way now. >> know, and i don't think the -- no, and i think white house made it clear there will not be an announcement of a new peace initiative as he visits the two parties. but the -- look, i want to get rhea for -- are rhea for a korea for a second here. one thing more important than putting the missile defense system in is that china now

looks like it has changed. that their inability to stop the nuclear test and now with these threats from north korea china seems to really now be changing its policy and actually getting involved in the latest rounds of sanctions and pushing harder. that may be the most critical thing that come from this if china and the obama administration are are now working in concert we may actually get north korea to stand down. >> chris: in the 30 seconds left, bill, what is the most we can expect from the president on the trip to israel? >> well, could expect and i think he will offer we have tried to offer reassurances to israel as he likes to put it that he has israel's back. i think that will be greeted with skepticism by the netanyahu government and if you are looking at the u.s. government honestly and cold eyes, clear eyes and a cold mind if you are the netanyahu government you think that your security depends on yourself and you don't trust president obama to act. >> chris: thank you, panel.

see you next week. check out panel plus where our group picks up with the discussion about the future of the republican party on our website fox newssunday .com and we will post the video before noon eastern time. follow us on twitter @ fox news sunday. up next, our power player of the week.

>>. >> chris: one of the favorite past times in washington is pick out the rising stars. somebody who qualifies in the last area is our power player of the week. >> we looked at the books a

month ahead and especially on weekends it's booked within minutes. >> he was one of the celebrity chefs. at his restaurant in frederick, maryland 45 minutes from washington folks are happy to pay hundred dollars a person for the privilege of eating his food. >> great satisfaction i get being a chef is when a diner tries something for the first time and i see the glow on their face, i know i have done my job. >> tonight's elimination challenge winner is ryan. >> he put himself on the map when he competed on top chef. one of the other contestants is his brother michael and the finals came down to the brothers. >> you are the top chef. >> congratulations. >> chris: how did it feel when your brother beat you? >> i was not